 |
|
|
|
Visit our sponsorsFill up our coffee fundBlogAdsMost EmailedVisit our sponsorsUpcoming events
 Who's newWho's onlineThere are currently 1 user and 1083 guests online.
Online users |
Get our Digestifs du jourNibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.
culturekitchensThe Publisher Daily servings of political dissent Grassroots News and Feminist Bloggers A new kind of vouyerism Art + Code + Philosophy Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP. Hot Topics
Member's articles and stories
Recent reviews
|
Words to live byThe way to fight this 'moving forward' frame is not to repeat it--that's the first step. The problem is, Americans want to talk about and correct all the problems the President created and we are in right now. And if we talk about 'moving forward' and looking up the road and turning points--we get distracted from the present. To reframe, we should force the debate to use a new phrase: This phrase focuses the discussion in Iraq, on immigration policy, on oil policy, on hurricane preparedness--focuses attention on the real concern: a government that fails to act in the face of huge problems. Subscribe Buttons                    | |
Edwards house
Bouldin said: (It's also worth noting that the Edwards' house is not of the dimensions and lavishness you claim)
Yes it is. Check this link:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/4535381.html
There was nothing libelous in anything I posted. I expressed my personal opinion that Edwards could have shown the guts to take sides in this case, instead of trying to be on both sides. Which is the truth.